About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
CSPAN 3
CSPAN2 3
KNTV (NBC) 3
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
CNN 2
CNNW 2
FBC 2
WRC (NBC) 2
CNBC 1
KQED (PBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WETA 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 36
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)
. the confirmation vote fort next defense secretary was held up until the current pentagon chief agreed to answer questions about last september's terrorist attack in libya. today a senate panel got to question leon panetta, national security correspondent jennifer griffin tells us not everyone was satisfied with what they heard. >> based on time, distance and alertouldn't have gotten there on time. >> time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, it takes hours to be able to respond. >> defense secretary leon panetta and joint chiefs chairman general martin dempsey explained why the military couldn't do more to save the lives of ambassador chris stevens, sean smith, tyrone woods and glenn dougherty in benghazi on september 11. >> united states military, as i've said, is not and frankly should not be a 911 service capable of arriving on the scene within minutes to every possible contingency around the world. >> republican senators weren't satisfied. >> did you know how long the attack was going to last, secretary panetta? >> no idea. >> well, it could have lasted for two days. any airplane lau
his people do every do and confirm from the pentagon knew was in charge with the state department or urgent -- but leon panetta says it is not 911 that when your people are in danger that is more than 911. lou: john bolton serving the government to hear the secretary of defense to realize the outcry and a need warhol from the ambassador and officials from the government as a 911 call and department of defense can respond, how upset were you? >> i was beyond upset and speechless to what the testimony showed. it revealed incompetence at the top of the obama administration that is breathtaking. the president not concerned with americans under attack, secretary of state's all day long never once called to ask what might be done? the idea secretary not aware for request for satiric -- security saying can we help you out? nobody is hauled in this administration with national security. not just the failure of benghazi on negative benghazi but exposing the risk of facilities, citizens and their country to attacks worldwide. these people and not doing their jobs. >> the senior people are n
to start with a washington battle on full display this week when the president's pick to head the pentagon, former republican senator chuck hagel, came under fire from members of his own party during a very contentious confirmation hearing. >> name one person in your opinion who's intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> are we right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> senator hagel, please answer the question i asked. today, do you think unilateral sanctions would be a bad idea? >> all this raising questions about how effective chuck hagel will be if confirmed as secretary of defense. earlier this weekend, i sat down for a rare joint interview with the top military leadership the outgoing secretary f defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general martin dempsey. >>> secretary panetta, welcome back to "meet the press." general dempsey, welcome. let me start with the man that is poised to take your place. he underwent on thursday a pretty tough round of questioning. he seemed to struggle with a lot of the answers. of cou
years, the pentagon said it can't afford to keep two aircraft carriers in the persian gulf. the u.s.s. truman would have left today from norfolk, virginia. defense secretary leon panetta blamed the cut back on is he quest ration saying if congress can't rewrite the law, things get worse. >> instead of being a first-rate power in the world, we turn into a second-rate power. that would be the result of sequester. >> you won't find this chairman arguing we need to do more with less. you'll find me arguing if that happens, we need to do less with less. >> russia will surpass u.s. defense spending in terms of overall percent of gdp in just two years. china is slated to overtake the u.s. in 2035. >> we've seen double digit increase s in chinese defense spending for more than 15 years now, and that really should not only give pause to the united states but it really should be a source of concern for the countries in the region as well. >> reporter: two years ago, then defense secretary robert gates brow beat nato allies to spent two percent of their gdp on defense. when france wanted to
to testify about the pentagon's response to the attack on ought consulate. he said the u.s. didn't have enough time to respond. he says it's not like you can pick up the phone and call 911. mike emanuel is on the hill. set the stage for us on this hearing. >> reporter: it's designed to address the concerns of south carolina senator lindsey graham who threatened to hold up the confirmation for chuck hagel, his successor. so what did the president know about the benghazi attack september 11, when did he know about it and what did he do about it? sources i talked to say panetta and others are carrying out the orders of the commander-in-chief. so what were they and how were they handled. expect fireworks. rick: later on this afternoon the president's nominee the head of the cia takes center stage. >> reporter: expect john brenner to get plenty of questions about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques during this time at cia. he left there in 2005. at the white house they are emphasizing brennan's experience. >> mr. brennan brings, i think, not on a vast amount of experience, but a sig
on capitol hill right now on the a hearing for the benghazi terror attack where he addressed the pentagon's response to the assault on our consulate on september 11th. four americans, including our ambassador to libya, died in that attack. this comes just a day after mr. panetta emotionally charged parting speech to students at georgetown university where he blasted the massive defense cuts known as the sequester, set to go into effect just weeks from now. >> if sequester happens, let me tell you some of the results. we will furlough as many as 800,000 dod civilians around the country for up to 22 days. they could face a 20% cut in their salary. you don't think that will impact on our economy? you don't think that's going to impact on jobs? you don't think that's going to impact on our ability to recover from the recession? jon: mr. panetta also deliver ad stark warning about the scale and scope of cyber attacks on this country saying they could cripple the united states. >> we are literally the target of thousands of cyber attacks every day. every day. thousands of sigher about attacks t
effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with the at the director of cia and continued to work with in this capacity. i found him to be responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations again al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is -- as somebody said, a straight shooter. somebody who, you know, gives you his best opinion, he doesn't play games. he is somebody who i think, you know, can honestly represent the best protection in this country in that job. >> thank you very much. i want to thank you for your forthright comments today about the sequester. ironically, as i take some notes what you said and in the statement. it appears as of today the greatest threat to american national security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. thank you, senator. senator nelson. after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us that want a few minutes on the second round. you have been here for about three hours and you may need a fife or ten minute break. do you want that immediately foll
of the events of the events in benghazi. there were a series of meetings in the pentagon for expanding the department of defense's response as well as to prepare for the potential outbreak of further violence throughout the region. during these meetings, secretary panetta authorized a number of deployments. i hope that secretary panetta and the chairman will provide the committee with detail on the circumstances that led them to these decisions. since september, there's been a great deal of focus on the supporting role that the marine corps guards played -- play in many u.s. diplomatic missions abroad. the marine corps did not have an lament in again-- in benghazi. the committee will be closely monitoring the use of these marines. our fiscal year 2013 national defense authorization act that requires the secretary of defense to conduct an assessment of the mission of the marine security guard program, whether it should be expanded and to report to congress on the results of this review. more immediately, the provision requires the secretary to develop a plan to increase the number of ma
other americans. the pentagon never received the request from the state academy for security, and did not have the resources to get support on the ground in time to thwart the attackers. leon panetta is stepping down. this hearing is four hours and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everybody. today the committee welcomes secretary of defense, leon panetta, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey. to testify about the department of defense's response the deadly terrorist attack on the u.s. temporary mission facility in benghazi, libya, last year. and the findings of its internal review following that attack, including lessons learned from benghazi. we will be receiving testimony next tuesday morning on the impact of sequestration and/or a full-year continuing resolution on the department of defense witnesses. there will be department secretary of defense, the comp driller and the joint chiefs of staff. i hope today's hearing with inform the committee of any changes being made or proposed to the posture of u.s.
your perspective on the pentagon's role in securing our embassies? we just had a near suicide attack, if you will, suicide bomber, at an embassy in turkey just last week. what can be done more than what has been done now? >> the important things to do are first of all you've got to build up the host country capacity. in the end, these embassies do depend on host country, the details that provide security. so you've got to try to develop that. >> this shouldn't be more marines? >> no, no. let me get the rest of the part of it. you have to harden these embassies as much as possible. and third, we have been working with the ste department to determine whether additional marines ought to be assigned to that area. and in the end, the final alternative is our ability to respond in having our troops in a position where they can respond quickly. but i have to tell you, a lot of that still is dependent on whether intelligence tells us that we've got a big problem, and gives us enough warning so that we can get to the place to respond. >> did you have enough time to get there in time? >> no. >
it calls "non- lethal" assistance. and with panetta's departure from the pentagon today, plus clinton's last week and petraeus's resignation in 2012, general dempsey is the only known remaining advocate of arming the rebels still in a top advisory role. i'm joined who served in the obama administration state departments and is now dean of the school of advanced international studies at johns hopkins university. and andrew tabler, a senior fellow at the washington institute for near east policy. what were the main schools of thought. how did the camps break down in this argument inside the administration on what to do about syria, andrew? >> basically you have a discussion about syria about all the different options. and it really comes down to this. the white house was hedgingment they really did not want to get involved in syria. they have a firm policy to stay out of the middle east and would like to pull back. at the same time the agencies that deal with syria and the problem there, which is growing and mushrooming, the state department, cia and to a certain extent the department o
chuck hagel's corn firmation as pentagon chief. what could republicans do? they could filibuster, i hear no signals that that's going to happen. i do not think that opposing the president's choice for a cabinet position is something that republicans want to fight with a filibuster. that's heavy artillery, i'm not sure they want to do, but they will voice their displeasure on the floor. most observers watching this think you're likely to see chuck hagel as the next defense secretary. >> if panetta doesn't serve up the red meat republicans want, could that hold up hagel's confirmation? >> he was out of office during benghazi, what did hold it up, there were republicans who said, until we get the current defense secretary who was around during bengha benghazi, down here in front of these committees, we're not going to confirm chuck hagel. >> what does this mean for the push for gun control measures? >> i think what we can say, watching the president from the time of the new town connecticut shootings, he promised to use the bully pulpit to push this. and he has. i think he will continue to
right now. chris lawrence joins us from the pentagon with that. so, chris, what do you know right now about his military background? >> well, erin, he's an officer. navy lieutenant in the naval reserve, who was just honorably discharged, just a couple weeks ago. you know, in his manifesto, he wrote the u.s. navy didn't instill the values of honor, courage, and commitment in me, but i thank them for sort of reemphasizing it in me. basically, he served in what was called a riverine unit. it's a small water, they work close to shore, ports, things like that, doing security. in fact, he deployed overseas to do security on an oil platform. so sort of different than what we think of as traditional navy. and right now, ncis, the naval criminal investigative service, is sharing a lot of that information with the local authorities there in l.a.. >> and chris, i'm curious, because back to this manifesto, this 11,000-word manifesto that he wrote, he wrote about his markenmanship and he said, i have always been the top shot, highest score, expert in rifle qualifications in every unit i have been
he knows and doesn't know about the pentagon because he didn't know much. why are the democrats going to lay down for this? >> if i were the democrats and i'm looking at a republican whose foreign policy views are very popular with the likes of pat buchanan, might have some second thoughts about that. nice a guy as pat is, his foreign policy view ace little bit crazy. chuck hagel obviously holds some views, has empathies that are out of the mainstream of the republicans and democrats. we have two parts that agree on a very aggressive interventionist policy. >> besides president obama, i admit the president usually gets his own. i don't see anybody laying down for this guy. and i read today, okay, i read pretty your stuff. i read it from a lot of stuff. he is refusing to disclose his financials. particularly his foreign financials. i don't know how you get through under those circumstances. >> the democrats will support him. the more important issue for them is barack obama. barack obama is still the number one issue in politics today. and democrats need his support to win in 2014. so
department or the pentagon are there. i think at some point the united states government and the white house have to make a decision that syria is an actual danger to america's national security interests. it is not something we can wash our hands from. and there are serious dangers and implications to the united states and the president actually to ask its national security team for realistic options that then he request gather his team and debate and decide about. there hasn't, i think, been a serious debate even within the united states government as to what might be our three top options what are the costs and benefits of each. and if we were to pursue one of them, how would we do it. >> is there a legitimate argument that this destabilizes turkey to some degree, an important country to the united states, and a nato ally, andrew. >> absolutely. thousands of syrians go over the border into turkey every day. and it's very easy for pkk fighters, kurdish fighters to meld into those refugees, to go across the border and carry out terrorists attacks inside of turkey. no government in turkey ca
discuss their experiences and challenges and comment on the pentagon's recently lifting of its ban on women in combat. they're joined by women who are served in the canadian and norwegian military. this event held here in washington d.c. it's about an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning. >> talking about new standards. so, anyway -- >> so all i can say is, wow. wow. i mean, it's really an honor to be here and to hear the testimonies of those amazing women who not only are deck candidated -- decorated combat veterans but are ridiculously articulate and to hear what their experiences were and what they had to share this morning. i'm truly honored to be here with this panel. all of these women are truly accomplished and have lifted the groundwork on lift -- they've been part of women forging areas into new paths of previously hi reticket -- previously-restricted service, and they have expertise on gender integration in the military. so their full bios are available in your program, but i'll give them each a brief introducti
there and can be a very effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with as director of the c.i.a. and continue to work with in this capacity. and i always found him to be very responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations against al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is somebody a straight shooter, somebody who gives you his best opinion. he doesn't play games. he's someone who i think can really honestly represent the best protection of this country in that job. >> thank you very much. and i want to thank you for your forth right comments today about the sequester. ironically as what you said in your statement, it appears the greatest threat to the united states security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. >> thank you. let me mention this, after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us who may want a few minutes on the second round and you two witnesses have been here for three hours and you may need a five or 10-minute break. do you want that following senator nelson or go
, there is concern of layoffs. the dimensions darpa -- you d darpa. the except the restraints on the pentagon plus those coming into play, that have negative impacts? >> we are not a big player in that space anymore. i think a little bit of catalyst is something you see in every corner of the world. whether it is europe or china or anyplace else, i did not go to one place where there is no one government at all. the private sector is still very strong here and innovative. the private sector can pick up a lot. just getting it done. the will be such a value in a just getting some of these things behind us so we can adjust to move forward. the sigh of relief is incredibly important right now. i am an optimist. it does not end with a discussion on washington. we can compete. the work force of the to this country is as good as any in the world. >> thank you for the optimistic note. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] moste church is boston's visited historic site. half a million come to the church every year because
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)